2. The Defendant had been punished several times for the same crime before the instant crime was committed, and was under suspension of execution due to the same crime at the time of the instant crime.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license, drive with a considerable degree of alcohol concentration of 0.124%, thereby leading to the instant crime.

Considering the above circumstances, the defendant shall be held liable with severe responsibility.

Although there are circumstances that may be taken into account the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects on the fact that the Defendant’s vehicle is subscribed to a motor vehicle comprehensive insurance, the lower court’s punishment is deemed reasonable and too unreasonable in light of all the circumstances that form the conditions for the instant sentencing as indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.